• Cleverdawny@lemm.eeOP
      12249·
      10 个月前

      Comrade, we all know lead poisoning and the need for safety gear are capitalist propaganda! Now, get back in the mines! Production must increase 50% this year, and your state-appointed union representative says it can!

        • Cleverdawny@lemm.eeOP
          4656·
          10 个月前

          You know, it took until 2003 for Russia to remove leaded gasoline from stations. The Soviets never did it LMFAO

          but nice try

          • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
            707·
            10 个月前

            EDIT: based on another commenter, OP’s claim isn’t even factual.

            And it took the US until 1996 (after fall of USSR)? Not to mention that it was capitalism (General Motors) that spread the hoax about leaded gasoline being safe, under the guise of scientific research in 1921.

            This is not the gotcha you think it is.

          • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
            656·
            10 个月前

            Did chatgpt not include this or…?

            https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.gatech.edu/dist/a/1473/files/2020/09/sovenv.pdf

            Nevertheless, the Soviet Union took effective action to protect the population from lead exposure; it banned lead-based (white lead) paint and it banned the sale of leaded gasoline in some cities and regions. While leaded gasoline was introduced in the 1920s in the United States, it was not until the 1940s that leaded gasoline was introduced in the Soviet Union (5). In the 1950s, the Soviet Un- ion became the first country to restrict the sale of leaded gaso- line; in 1956, its sale was banned in Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, Baku, Odessa, and tourist areas in the Caucasus and Crimea, as well as in at least one of the “closed cities” of the nuclear weap- ons complex (6, 7). The motivation for the bans on leaded gaso- line is not entirely clear, but factors may have included Soviet research on the effects of low-level lead exposure (8), or sup- port from Stalin himself (5). In any event, the bans on leaded gasoline in some areas prevented what could have been signifi- cant population lead exposure. In the United States and other OECD countries, leaded gasoline has been identified as one of the largest sources of lead exposure (9, 10). Lead-based paint is another potentially significant source of population lead exposure.

            Bonus: a great example of capital at work,

            Along with a number of other coun- tries, in the 1920s the Soviet Union adopted the White Lead Convention, banning the manufacture and sale of lead-based (white lead) paint (11). In the United States, however, the National Paint, Oil and Varnish Association successfully opposed the ban, and lead-based paint was not banned in the United States until 1971 (12).

            Two generations of Americans.

        • BigNote@lemm.ee
          521·
          10 个月前

          And your point is?

          Please do share an example of industrialization that somehow doesn’t include unforseen negative health effects.

          Go on now, we’ll wait.

          • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
            344·
            10 个月前

            My point is that capital has successfully fought to put lead into American’s blood and lungs for over 100 years.

            • BigNote@lemm.ee
              15·
              10 个月前

              So in other words you are unwilling to answer the question.

              Got it.

              This is precisely why I say that you aren’t intellectually serious people.

              • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
                51·
                10 个月前

                You have one question in your previous comment on the very first line, and it was answered.

                Your statement on the 2nd line doesn’t really make sense, as I don’t think anyone blames people for unforseen negative health effects.

                What people are upset about are the forseen, proven, endemic negative health effects being purposefully spread for over a century.

                • BigNote@lemm.ee
                  1·
                  9 个月前

                  What a crock of shit!

                  Why would capital willingly poison its workforce as a deliberate policy? That makes zero sense.

                  I can see capital writing it off as a necessary side-cost of doing business, but I can’t see it as a deliberate policy.

                  Again, it makes no sense. Capital wants a relatively healthy workforce, not one that’s falling apart due to lead-caused neurological decrepitude.

                • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
                  14·
                  10 个月前

                  I like how tankies conveniently forget that Marxism is just as authoritarian, just as evil, just as violent, and just as failed (in both theory and practice) as fascism. Actually, Marxism has a greater death toll than fascism. It is the ideology of scum. Tankies and neo nazis are the same level of insufferable trash.

                  • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
                    32·
                    10 个月前

                    Are you a bot? You’re firing off AM radio talking points at a pretty rapid clip.

          • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
            597·
            10 个月前

            The first commenter is talking a hypothetical scenario of socialism being bad, so the second commenter (the one you responded to) responded with actual example of that same hypothetical scenario happening, but except by a capitalist power (the US). I don’t think your response makes sense at all here.

            • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
              546·
              10 个月前

              No, his response is calling out the whataboutism fallacy. The US doing something bad does not in any way, shape, or form make socialism any less shitty. It’s poking fun at the delusional people who still think it’s a good ideology despite the overwhelming evidence.

              • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
                215·
                10 个月前

                Calling something “Whataboutism” infers a belief in American exceptionalism. You should question that belief.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                912·
                10 个月前

                Claiming Whataboutism is a logical fallacy first used by English colonizers, dont use it

                • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
                  37·
                  10 个月前

                  Calling out whataboutism is perfectly acceptable when it is being used regardless of its origins.

                  It is in no way a logical fallacy and in fact the use of whataboutism is itself a logical fallacy.

                  The flaw in gorilladrum’s argument is that the hypothetical example demonstrates the flaws in that specific situation and does not address problems in socialism as a whole yet they suggest it dismisses the ideology completely.

                  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                    55·
                    10 个月前

                    People cry whataboutism when they dislike people throwing context that goes against their argument into a discussion.

      • Mudface@lemmy.world
        614·
        10 个月前

        The Glorious Leader has declared that we have too much lead. You’re now reassigned to be in front of the firing squad.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.eeOP
        66·
        10 个月前

        Tbh I’d rather work in a uranium mine, it’s less toxic than lead in the quantities you’d be exposed to

        • qarbone@lemmy.worldEnglish
          115·
          10 个月前

          If you are not dead by end of month from radiation, you will be executed for failing to mine the required quantity of uranium.

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        35·
        10 个月前

        Remind me, what did they do to indigenous people when they were trying to get uranium for the Manhattan project?

        This nonsense is just western projection.